(1) To present evidence that the U.S. government’s official investigation into the events of September 11, 2001, as pursued by various government and government-appointed agencies, is seriously flawed and has failed to describe and account for the 9/11 events.
(2) To single out the most weighty evidence of the inadequacy of the U.S. government’s investigation; to organize and classify that evidence; to preserve that evidence; to make that evidence widely known to the public and to governmental, non-governmental and inter-governmental organizations.
(3) To submit a record and a summary of the Hearings, together with signed Statutory Declarations by witnesses, to relevant governments, groups and international agencies with the request that a full and impartial investigation be launched into the events of September 11, 2001, which have been used to initiate military invasions and to restrict the rights of citizens.
(4) To engage the attention of the public, the international community and the media through witness testimony as well as through media events broadcasted via the Internet during the four day event.
“An Ivy League Education for less than $20 a month. Why not?”
At the time there were only a smattering of course materials online. That's changing. It's coming. Here's an example of a class that signed up 56,000 people in two weeks.
Another example of a highly scalable education product: Codecademy
The way to repair and revitalize modern civilization is on the horizon. It follows a simple dictum:
Localize production. Virtualize everything else.
With the above, we see the virtualization of formal education (books were the first wave).
Some other thoughts on this:
It can drop costs by 3 orders of magnitude. $20 a year instead of $20,000.
It means that the best instructors teach almost everyone. Why not the best?
Phi Beta Iota: There is actually a much larger variant of free online education, and that it the YouTube 2-5 minute micro-class revolution, in which citizen experts create concise lectures on single specific micro-knowledge, for example, a type of algebra problem, or mixing hydoponic solutions, etcetera.
My colleague Robert Soden was absolutely right: Tomnod is definitely iRevolution material. This is why I reached out to the group a few days ago to explore the possibility of using their technology to crowdsource the analysis of satellite imagery for Somalia. You can read more about that project here. In this blog post, however, is to highlight the amazing work they’ve been doing with National Geographic in search of Genghis Khan’s tomb.
Core Concept: “That a generalized, technology-enhanced capacity for manifold cooperation has become the main productive force means that there is no longer any contradiction between ethics and economics. On the contrary, the ethical ability to open up to and share with others has become the most fundamental quality of a successful economic agent.”
Socio-Political Implications: This also means that the old models for institutionalizing ethics and economics, representative democracy and private property are becoming obsolete. Politics is no longer a separate practice, best handled by expert politicians. On the contrary the basic political practice of constructing a common social world, an ethical surplus has become a fundamental aspect of economic production. A brand community is like a social movement, open source is a political program, and a self-managed slum or a cooperative micro-credit system is also a project for a different political order.
MoblleActive.org recently had the opportunity to test an off-the-grid GSM base station. Kurtis Heimerl presented The Village Base Station (VBTS), (link is a PDF) a low-power means of providing mobile network service without grid power or network infrastructure.
Phi Beta Iota: As best we can tell, OpenBTS is central–vital–to the achievement of Open Society as well as Open Government, and is the only way that we can reasonably scale free to very low cost Internet access to the five billion poor.
Deliberative public engagement is a distinctive approach to involving people in decision-making. It is different from other forms of engagement in that it is about giving participants time to consider and discuss an issue in depth before they come to a considered view. The aim of this 18-page background paper (2008) from Involve and the National Consumer Council is to encourage and support deliberative public engagement in public policy.
Deliberation itself – where a range of people learn, discuss and work out solutions together – is not new. Forums, advisory groups, partnerships and some forms of consultation have done this for years and are becoming increasingly sophisticated. More recently, citizens’ juries and large-scale citizens’ summits have found favour with government and public service providers at both local and national levels.
Involve and the National Consumer Council (NCC) believe that deliberative public engagement can be valuable in helping to create better public services, promote social cohesion and foster a thriving democracy. There is already good practice throughout the UK, and the full potential contribution of deliberation to improving the quality of decisions and policy solutions, and to enhancing representative democracy is becoming clearer as experience grows.
The government and other public bodies are currently developing general guidelines on public and stakeholder engagement – making it timely for Involve and NCC to draw on the growing body of learning and evidence to contribute a set of specific principles on deliberative public engagement from outside government.
This is far from being the last word. Over the next year Involve and NCC will continue to monitor the field, listen to feedback on the value and relevance of these principles, and consider the potential need for more detailed guidance. In the mean time, we hope our work will contribute to the already-flourishing debate on the role of deliberative public engagement in Britain today.
Phi Beta Iota: The 18 page document is available in English, French, and Turkish. The nine principles of public engagement discussed in the document are:
The process makes a difference.
The process is transparent.
The process has integrity.
The process is tailored to circumstances.
The process involves the right number and types of people.
The process treats participants with respect.
The process gives priority to participants' discussions.
The process is reviewed and evaluated to improve practice.
Here’s the plan. He talks to UNOSAT and Google about acquiring high-resolution satellite imagery for those geographic areas for which they need more information on. A colleague of mine in San Diego just launched his own company to develop mechanical turk & micro tasking solutions for disaster response. He takes this satellite imagery and cuts it into say 50×50 kilometers square images for micro-tasking purposes.
We then develop a web-based interface where volunteers from the Standby Volunteer Task Force (SBTF) sign in and get one high resolution 50×50 km image displayed to them at a time. For each image, they answer the question: “Are there any human shelters discernible in this picture? [Yes/No].” If yes, what would you approximate the population of that shelter to be? [1-20; 21-50; 50-100; 100+].” Additional questions could be added. Note that we’d provide them with guidelines on how to identify human shelters and estimate population figures.
